BET Module 2 Measuring and Assessing Impacts and
BET Module 2 Measuring and Assessing Impacts and Dependencies 24 th October 2012 Santiago, Chile Prepared for: Consejo Minero de Chile A. G. and Antofagasta Minerals S. A. By James Spurgeon, Sustain Value james. spurgeon@sustainvalue. co. uk www. sustainvalue. co. uk
Business Ecosystems Training – Contributors All content is based on WBCSD material and publically available reports. BET curriculum and structure was designed by for , adapted here by and The structure and content development of BET was governed by an Advisory Committee consisting of WBCSD member companies and Regional Network partners, NGOs, UN and academic institutions. 2
Session 1 Introduction
Where does Module 2 sit within the broader training available? Module 1: Understanding the links between ecosystem services and business Module 2: Measuring and assessing impacts and dependencies Module 4: Managing and mitigating impacts Module 3: Introduction to valuing ecosystem services 4
Module 2 – Objectives By the end of the module, delegates should be able to: Ë Understand approaches for measuring ecosystem services impact and dependency. Ë Understand the business case for assessing impacts and dependencies on ecosystems. Ë Introduce the Ecosystem Services Review (ESR) framework/methodology to understand impact and dependency on ecosystem service change. Ë Understand how and why ES could be integrated with Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIAs) Ë Be aware of other potential relevant tools and approaches to use. 5
How are companies addressing this issue? Arcelor. Mittal, Rio Tinto, Anglo American, BHP Billiton, Antofagasta etc. Conduct comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessments as part of permitting process Rio Tinto, Antofagasta, Cemex and Alcoa Trialed and used Corporate Ecosystem Services Review to identify ecosystem service related risks and opportunities Pepsi. Co Worked to reduce water use in rice plantations to achieve positive water balance in operations (India). GDF SUEZ / SITA France Biodiversity Quality Index to objectively assess and follow up biodiversity quality of landfill sites Source: WBCSD, Responding to the Biodiversity Challenge 6
How are companies addressing this issue? (cont. ) Unilever “By 2020 we will source 100% of our agricultural raw materials sustainably” Source: http: //www. unilever. com/sustainability/environment/ agriculture/index. aspx Puma “By 2015, 25% reduction of CO 2, energy, water and waste in Puma offices, stores, warehouses and direct supplier factories” Source: http: //ir 2. flife. de/data/puma/igb_html/index. php? bericht_ id=1000004&index=&lang=ENG Sony “Sony strives to achieve a zero environmental footprint throughout the lifecycle of our products and business activities by 2050” Source: http: //www. sony. net/Sony. Info/csr/environment/management/gm 2015 /index. html 7
Session 2 Measuring change in Ecosystem Service provision – common approaches
Footprinting Carbon footprint: “Overall amount of carbon dioxide (CO 2) and other greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions” Source: EU Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability Water footprint: “Is an empirical indicator of how much water is consumed, when and where, measured over the whole supply chain of the product” Source: Water Footprint Network Ecological footprint: “Measures the land sea area people require to produce resources that we consume” Source: Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) 9
Supply / value chains Value chain: all of the upstream and downstream activities associated with the operations of the company Supply chain: the network of organizations (e. g. manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors and retailers) involved in the production, delivery, and sale of a product to the consumer. Suppliers can be separated into Tiers, each of which has different ecosystem impacts / dependencies Tier 2 supplier Tier 1 supplier Impacts a Company activities nd depen Downstream value chain dencies Ecosystem services 10
Value chain footprints – Puma 2010 GHG emissions by value chain source 2010 Water use by Value Chain Source 2% 9% 15% 36% 18% 52% 16% 15% PUMA operations*. . . Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 … Tier 2 supplier 37% Tier 1 supplier PUMA operations*. . . Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Company activities February 2012 Downstream value chain 11
Value chain footprints – Unilever GHG emissions 26% 3% 2% + Raw materials 68% + Manufacture 1% + Transport + Consumer use Disposal Water footprint approx 50% <0. 1% 50% Water used in the raw material we source Water we add to the product Water used by consumers in water-scarce countries Tier 2 supplier Tier 1 supplier Company activities Downstream value chain 12
Environmental & Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) A process for assessing project related impacts Source: EU Environmental Impact Assessment Steps 13
Session 3 Case study – Ecological assessments
Case study: Arcelor. Mittal The issue Mining in Liberia – an environmental and social challenge Ë Arcelor. Mittal, the world’s leading steel company, started new iron ore mining operations in Liberia at the end of 2011. Ë Liberia has one of the richest seams of iron ore in Africa. Ë However, some of most accessible seams of ore are in remote Nimba mountain range, one of the few remaining West African wet-zone forests, and home to many unique species and ecosystems. Ë These forests are important habitat for smaller mammals, an integral part of diet for local people. Ë Challenge: to establish iron ore extracting operations without destroying these special habitats or fragile local livelihoods. Photo Credit: Arcelor. Mittal 15
Case study: Arcelor. Mittal (cont. ) The response Ë Build a solid basis for decision making: by carrying out a largescale, ecological study over several years in both the wet and dry seasons. Due to the civil war, little knowledge about local biodiversity existed. Ë Assembled a large team of specialists and partners from Liberia and other neighboring countries, including: Ë Ë Ë Ë Liberian Forestry Development Authority Conservation International Fauna and Flora International, Afrique Nature, Sylvatrop, Wild Chimpanzee Foundation Action pour la Conservation de la Biodiversité en Côte d’Ivoire. Photo Credit: Arcelor. Mittal 16
Case study: Arcelor. Mittal (cont. ) The results Ë Ecological study proved forests close to proposed mine sites had high levels of biodiversity (e. g. identified over 700 species of butterflies and moths) Ë Study revealed that biodiversity was under threat from long-term degradation and decline, due to logging, agriculture and previous mining operations. Ë Arcelor. Mittal had opportunity not only to mitigate damage from mining, but to start reversing that trend. Ë One of the positive consequences of the work was the establishment of an energetic local stakeholder group, which has: Ë Brought together the different agencies working in the area with the community representatives. Ë Helped the government to make conservation its priority in this area, rather than commercial logging. 17
Case study: Arcelor. Mittal (cont. ) The results (cont. ) Ë Initial discussions and planning forest rehabilitation and protection work took place between 2009 and 2011. Ë Implementation will take approximately 15 years of growing input, and began in 2011. Ë These biodiversity conservation actions helped to secure a ‘license to operate’ among government authorities. Ë It also helped Arcelor. Mittal with the compensation process for the local communities, who rely on the existing ecosystems, involving the design and implementation of a biodiversity offset program. 18
Session 4 Policy
International policy trends – Introduction to the CBD Issue recognition – heightened concern over damage / loss of species and ecosystems (1970 s) International response – Strategic Goal B – headline target 4: impacts and dependencies National response – Aichi Target 4: signatories and national laws, Mitigation – ongoing e. g. EU Biodiversity Action “By 2020, at the latest, Governments, Plan business and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable production and consumption and have kept the impacts of use of natural resources wellon industry – Impact within safe ecological limits. ” innovative solutions; change of business of usual 20
Session 5 The business case for action
Vittel Photo Credit: Nestlé Waters 22
Energia Global (now Enel Latin America) 23
Potlatch 24
Allegheny Energy 25
What do these stories have in common? Ë Companies facing unexpected risks or novel opportunities arising from their dependence and impact on ecosystems n Vittel and Energia – Risk n Potlatch and Allegheny – Opportunity 26
How can ecosystem service assessments help? Effective communication of complex and technical information Better informed decision-making Identifying and Anticipating new prioritising markets and business risks influencing policy and opportunities development Improving stakeholder relationships Strengthening environmental management Demonstrating leadership in corporate sustainability Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation 27
Session 6 Introduction to the Ecosystem Services Review
The Corporate Ecosystem Services Review (ESR) What is the ESR? A structured methodology that helps managers proactively develop strategies to manage business risks and opportunities arising from their company’s dependence and impact on ecosystems. 29
Steps in a corporate ecosystem services review Step 1. Select the scope Key activity Choose boundary within which to conduct ESR Ë Business unit Ë Product Ë Market Ë Landholdings Ë Customer Ë Supplier Estimated time 1 -2 weeks 2. Identify priority ecosystem services 3. Analyze trends in priority services Systematically evaluate degree of company’s dependence and impact on ecosystem services Determine highest ‘priority’ services – those most relevant to business performance 1 -2 weeks Evaluate conditions and trends in priority ecosystem services, as well as drivers of these trends 2 -5 weeks 4. Identify business risks and opportunities Identify and evaluate business risks and opportunities that might arise due to the trends in priority ecosystem services 1 -2 weeks 5. Develop strategies Outline and prioritize strategies for managing the risks and opportunities 1 -2 weeks Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation February 2012 30
Step 1. Considerations when selecting the scope 1. Which stage of the value chain? Suppliers 2. Who and where specifically? Ë Which supplier(s)? Ë In which geographic market(s)? Company Ë What aspect of the company? n Business unit n Product line Customers Ë Which customer(s)? Ë In which geographic market(s)? n Facility n Project 3. Is it strategic, timely, and supported? n Landholdings Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation 31
Step 2. Identifying priority ecosystem services Suppliers Ecosystem service Dependence Impact Company operations Dependence Impact Customers Dependence Impact Provisioning Crops – Livestock – Capture fisheries Aquaculture Wild foods + Timber and other wood fiber + Other fibers (e. g. , cotton, hemp, silk) Biomass fuel + Freshwater – Genetic resources ? + Biochemicals, natural medicines, and pharmaceuticals Key: High Medium Low + Positive impact – Negative impact ? Don’t know Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation February 2012 32
Step 2. Identifying priority ecosystem services (cont. ) Suppliers Ecosystem service Dependence Impact Company operations Dependence Impact Customers Dependence Impact Regulating Air quality regulation ? ? Global climate regulation + Regional/local climate regulation + Water regulation – Erosion regulation – – Water purification and waste treatment Disease regulation Pest regulation Pollination Natural hazard regulation Cultural Recreation and ecotourism + Ethical values + Key: High Medium Low + Positive impact – Negative impact ? Don’t know Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation 33
Step 3. Ecosystem service trends and drivers framework Condition and trends in the ecosystem service Ë Supply and demand Ë Quantity and quality Ë Present and future Company activities Direct drivers Activities of others Ë Ë Ë Ë Who – the company How Where To what degree Changes in land use and land cover Overconsumption Climate change Pollution Who – stakeholders How Where To what degree Invasive, non-native species Other Indirect drivers Ë Ë Ë Governmental Demographic Economic Technological Cultural and religious Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation 34
Step 4. Types of risks and opportunities arising from trends in ecosystem services Not Exhaustive Type Risk Opportunity Operational Ë Increased scarcity or cost of inputs Ë Increased efficiency Ë Reduced output or productivity Ë Low-impact industrial processes Ë Disruption to business operations Regulatory and Ë Extraction moratoria legal Ë Lower quotas Ë Formal license to expand operations Ë New products to meet new regulations Ë Fines Ë User fees Ë Permit or license suspension Ë Opportunity to shape government policy Ë Permit denial Ë Lawsuits Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation 35
Step 4. Types of risks and opportunities arising from trends in ecosystem services (cont. ) Not Exhaustive Type Risk Opportunity Reputational Ë Damage to brand or image Ë Improved or differentiated brand Ë Challenge to social ‘license to operate’ Market and product Ë Changes in customer preferences (public sector, private sector) Ë New products or services Ë Markets for certified products Ë Markets for ecosystem services Ë New revenue streams from company-owned or managed ecosystems Financing Ë Higher cost of capital Ë Increased investment by progressive lenders and socially Ë More rigorous lending requirements responsible investment funds Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation 36
Step 5. Categories of strategies Internal changes Ë Operations Ë Product strategy Ë Market strategy Ë Procurement strategy Ë Land management Ë etc. Sector or stakeholder engagement Ë Industry peer collaboration Ë Cross-sector collaboration Ë NGO collaboration Ë Transactions with stakeholders Policy-maker engagement Ë Tax incentives Ë Subsidy reforms Ë Protected areas Ë Zoning Ë etc. Source: WRI, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation 37
Session 7 Example ESR
Case study: Cemex – ESR for quarry rehabilitation Step 1 – Scope Ë 100 hectare gravel pit in France – farmland forest area Ë ESR focussed on quarry operation and rehabilitation over 25 years Ë Worked with Ligue pour la Protection des Oiseaux (LPO) - their French Birdlife International partner. Before After 39
Case study: Cemex (cont) Step 2 – Identify priority ecosystem services Ë Involved outside experts to avoid bias Ë Adapted the tool to score each ES Ë Key ES were: Ë Crop production – negative impact at start of quarrying – positive impact after rehabilitation Before Ë Freshwater – dependent for aggregate production process and impacts through quarries filling with water Ë Recreation – potential to enhance recreation by developing walkways, fishing and boating activities Ë Global and regional climate change impacts – diesel quarrying equipment and land cover changes. After Ë Ethical values - potential negative impacts from alien species and positive impacts from creating wetland habitat 40
Case study: Cemex (cont) Step 3 – Analyse trends in Priority ES Ë Leveraged information from corporate land use plans and an ESIA. Ë Extensive literature reviews and expert interviews Ë Key finding was lack of information about aquifers Ë so now collect more information on this Before After 41
Case study: Cemex (cont) Step 4 and 5 – Identify business risks and opportunities and develop strategies Ë Undertook two steps together in two workshops Ë Workshop 1 Ë Discussed results of steps 1 and 2 Before Ë Brainstormed list of risks, opportunities and associated strategies Ë Workshop 2 Ë Prioritized strategies that best align with corporate competencies and goals After 42
Case study: Cemex (cont) Step 4 and 5 – Outcome Ë Provide technical assistance (e. g. to farmers) to improve watershed health (e. g. from reduced chemical and nutrient run-off) Ë Increase invasive species control Before Ë Enhance ES that underpin local tourism Ë Quantify carbon benefits of restoration (as quarry rehabilitation has positive effect on GHG) Source: WRI ES case study materials After 43
Session 8 Integrating ES in ESIAs
Integrating ES into ESIA ES analysis may be: Ë Undertaken as a separate study (e. g. an ESR) and annexed Ë Integrated directly within the ESIA process and EIS sections, Ë Or both. How: Ë Ideally by someone experienced in ES Ë And/or draw upon ecology, sociology and scientific skills (e. g. hydrologist, coast processes expert etc. ) Ë Site visit, study maps, explore literature and consult stakeholders etc. 45
Stages for incorporating ES into ESIA Ë Screening stage: ES can be included, particularly if any major ES may be affected Ë Scoping stage: Ideal to include potential ES dependencies and impacts at this stage, when scheme design can still be influenced. Ë Baseline: Highlight environmental and societal linkages, and future trends Ë Impact assessment: Provides broader perspective to identify impacts and dependencies – good potential linkages for incorporating stakeholder values Ë Mitigation measures: Helps identify wider range of risks to mitigate and opportunities for enhancements 46
Case study: Alcoa – Integrating ES in ESIA Aim: carry out ESR and ESIA in parallel ESR Step 1 – Scope Ë Baie-Comeau modernized smelter in its 2015 configuration Before 440, 000 Ë The smelter was created in 1957 and currently produces tons a year of primary aluminium Ë Located within a World Biosphere Reserve which has 8 ecosystem types including boreal forest, arctic tundra and salt pan Ë The ES excludes aluminium ore production and electricity generation After 47
Case study: Alcoa (cont) ESR Step 2 – Identify priority ES Ë Evaluated dependence and impact of 24 ES Ë Some, such as water already covered in ESIA Ë Others, such as pollination needed additional information to be collected analyzed Before Ë Priority ES with high dependence or impact: Ë Freshwater Ë Air quality regulation Ë Global climate change regulation Ë Water purification and waste treatment Ë Recreation and ecotourism After Ë Ethical values (seven sensitive species including cod, blue whale and rock vole) Ë Wildfoods 48
Case study: Alcoa (cont) ESR Step 3 – Analyse trends in priority ES Ë Identified potential increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather incidents Ë In addition to determining baseline information in ESIA, Before more effort should be put on determining trends over time. After 49
Case study: Alcoa (cont) ESR Step 4 – Identify business risks and opportunities Ë Climate regulation most important risk: Ë More extreme weather incidents could lead to erosion problems and water level issues for hydropower Ë Significant GHG emissions Before After 50
Case study: Alcoa (cont) ESR Step 5 – Develop strategies Ë The following arose from both the ESIA and ESR: Ë Recycle program to re-use earth and solid wastes Ë Footprint maintained to avoid additional biodiversity impacts Ë One scenario excluded due to water issues Before Ë New technology and larger boats used to reduce GHG Ë Strengthen biodiversity monitoring – sensitive species Ë Equipment and site layout chosen to reduce noise impact Source: Alcoa – Ecosystem services review of an aluminum smelter in a biosphere reserve After 51
Integrating ES in ESIA - Summary Combined ES and ESIA approach – advantages: Ë Allows wider and more systematic understanding of impacts and dependence on ES Ë Systematizes collection of information – generating better knowledge Ë Minimizes risk of omitting significant issues Ë Helps identify broader risks and opportunities Before Ë Helps highlight linkages between environment and society – adds a ‘so what? ’ perspective to biodiversity issues Ë Increases understanding of secondary, cumulative and interrelationship effects on ecosystems as a whole rather than on specific habitats and species. After Ë One step closer to identifying and valuing different stakeholder values 52
Session 9 Introduction to Tools, Frameworks and Methodologies
Measuring ecosystem services change Ë Strategic tools e. g. Life cycle assessment, risk assessment and so on. . Ë Global Water tool Ë GHG protocol Ë Measuring Impact framework Ë Measuring social impacts Ë Equator principles Ë Other tools u d ro t n i ef Bri n o i ct 54
Measuring ecosystem services change (cont. ) Business analytical approaches: Monetary Ë Corporate Ecosystem Valuation Ë Natural resource damage assessments Ë Other tools, that help place monetary values on ecosystems 3 e l u d o M n i d e r e ov C 55
Measuring ecosystem services change (cont. ) Business analytical approaches: Sustainability non-monetary Ë Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Ë Strategic Impact Assessment Ë Multi-criteria analysis Ë Sustainability appraisals Ë Risk Assessment Ë Life Cycle Analysis 56
Global Water Tool A free and easy-to-use tool for companies and organizations to map their water use and assess risks relative to their global operations and supply chains. Ë Customized versions released to meet the needs of specific sectors, i. e. oil and gas; power and utilities. 57
What does it do? Compares your company’s water use with validated water, sanitation, population and biodiversity information Establishes relative water risks in a company’s portfolio in order to prioritize action Creates key water reporting indicators in addition to inventories, risk and performance metrics (GRI, Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes, Bloomberg, Carbon Disclosure Project Water) Enables effective communication with internal and external stakeholders Identifies biodiversity hotspots with relation to water 58
Projected annual renewable supply person (2025) INCLUDE ANIMATION – BLANK MAP AND COLORED MAP (FADE) 59
Projected annual renewable supply person (2025) INCLUDE ANIMATION – BLANK MAP AND COLORED MAP (FADE) 60 Supplier Office Retail Industrial
GHG protocol Ë Developed by WBCSD and World Resource Institute. Ë Protocol for quantifying and reporting the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions benefits of climate change mitigation initiatives. Ë Corporate Standard adopted by International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and The Climate Registry. Ë Specific protocols and calculation tools for various industries. Ë Updates include Corporate Value Chain Accounting and Reporting Standard and product lifecycle standard. February 2012 61
GHG protocol (cont. ) February 2012 62
Measuring social change What are social impacts? Ë Social impacts are much broader than the limited issues often considered in environmental impact assessments n Social impacts are the consequences to human populations of any public or private actions n The term also includes cultural impacts involving changes to the norms, values, and beliefs that guide and rationalize their cognition of themselves and their society Ë Social Impact Assessment (SIA) – approach that consists in analysing, monitoring and managing the social consequences of development Ë Social Analysis Tools by the World Bank – focus more on the impact of polices and social risk assessment 63
WBCSD - Measuring Impact Framework Ë ‘Beyond the bottom line’ – why measuring impacts on society makes business sense, and how to do this. Ë Framework adopts a 4 -step methodology: n Step 1: Set boundaries n Step 2: Measure direct and indirect impacts n Step 3: Assess contribution to development n Step 4: Prioritize management response February 2012 64
The Equator Principles What are they? Ë Around 70 ‘Equator Banks’ have committed to not providing loans to projects where the borrower will not, or is unable to, comply with their social and environmental policies and procedures Ë Based on International Finance Corporation’s 8 ‘Performance Standards’ and World Bank Guidelines for environmental and social impact assessment Ë Adopted voluntarily by the financial institutions Ë Applicable when total project capital costs exceed US $10 million Objectives of Performance Standard 6: Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resource Management Ë “To protect and conserve biodiversity. Ë To maintain the benefits from ecosystem services Ë To promote the sustainable management of living natural resources through the adoption of practices that integrate conservation needs and development priorities. ” 65
IFC Performance Standard 6 (cont. ) Scope of PS 6 Ë The applicability of PS 6 is established during the Social and Environmental Assessment process. Ë Based on the risks and impacts identification process, the requirements of PS 6 are applied to projects: (i) located in modified, natural, and critical habitats; (ii) that potentially impact on or are dependent on ecosystem services over which the client has direct management control or significant influence Requirements “As a matter of priority, the client should seek to avoid impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services. When avoidance of impacts is not possible, measures to minimize impacts and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services should be implemented. “ 66
IFC Performance Standard 6 (cont. ) Ë If a project is likely to adversely affect ES, a systematic review‘of priority’ES is needed (e. g. an ESR) Priority ESs are those: I. Most likely to impact Affected Communities, which the Project has direct management control or significant influence over: Avoid, minimise and mitigate to maintain ES value and functionality plus compensate II. Which the Project is directly dependent upon for its operations Minimise impacts and increase resource efficiency 67
Other tools / frameworks / methodologies Ë Eco. AIM Ë IUCN Redlist Ë Eco. Metrix Ë IPIECA Ecosystems Services Guidance Ë IBAT Ë Living Planet Report Ë Risk and Opportunities Analysis within the pharmaceuticals sector (KPMG) Ë In. VEST Ë Rivers for Tomorrow Toolkit Ë Hydro. SHEDS Ë More in development. . . February 2012 68
Disclaimer Business Ecosystems Training (BET) is a capacity building program released in the name of the WBCSD. It is the result of a collaborative effort by members of the secretariat and senior executives from KPMG and an Advisory Committee composed of member companies, Regional Network partners, NGOs, UN and academic institutions, and others. A wide range of members reviewed drafts, thereby ensuring that BET broadly represents the majority of the WBCSD membership. It does not mean, however, that every member company agrees with every word. Business Ecosystems Training (BET) has been prepared for capacity building only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in BET without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in BET and its translations in different languages, and, to the extent permitted by law, WBCSD, KPMG, members of the Advisory Committee, their members, employees and agents do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this capacity building program or for any decision based on it. Copyright © World Business Council for Sustainable Development February 2012 Disclaimer and information on Sustain Value The original four part BET Modules have been significantly cut down and adapted to a mining context by James Spurgeon of Sustain Value. This has been to convert the two day general BET course into a one day course targeted at the mining sector in Chile, on behalf of the Chilean Mining Council and Antofagasta Minerals S. A. The revised materials do not constitute professional advice, and no representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in the slides, most of which is reliant on external sources. In preparing and delivering the revised BET course, James Spurgeon has been able to draw upon 20 years of international experience undertaking Environmental Impact Assessments, Ecosystem Service Assessments, Corporate Ecosystem Valuations and Biodiversity Offsets; and developing numerous bespoke tools for companies and governments to apply the concepts in a simple and cost-effective manner. February 2012 69
References Ë WBCSD. Connecting the Dots presentation Ë WBCSD. Corporate Ecosystem Services Review Ë WBCSD. ESR case studies Ë WBCSD. Responding to the Biodiversity Challenge: Business contributions to the Convention on Biological Diversity http: //www. wbcsd. org/work-program/ecosystems-training-tools. aspx Ë WBCSD, Ecosystem Services Review Standard Presentation Ë WBCSD, Guide to Corporate Ecosystem Valuation (long and detailed) http: //www. wbcsd. org/web/ecosystems/RTSummaries/PPT/WBCSD_CEV_long_final. ppt Ë WBCSD and IFC (2008), Measuring Impact Framework Methodology, http: //www. wbcsd. org/templates/Template. WBCSD 5/layout. asp? type=p&Menu. Id=MTU 3 Mw Ë EU Environmental Impact Assessment Steps http: //ec. europa. eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/evalsed/sourcebooks/method_techniques/conducting _impact_assessments/environmental_impact/main_steps_en. htm Ë JRC EU Commission – http: //lct. jrc. europa. eu/pdf-directory/Carbon-footprint. pdf Ë Water Footprint Org – http: //www. waterfootprint. org/? page=files/FAQ_Technical_questions Ë WWF. Ecological Footprint – http: //footprint. wwf. org. uk/static/faq Ë WRI, Ecosystem Services Review – http: //www. wri. org/project/ecosystem-services-review/tools Ë Interorganizational Committee on Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment (2003). Ë Vanclay, F. , 2003. SIA principles: International Principles for Social Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. Available online: http: //www. iaia. org/publicdocuments/sections/sia/IAIA-SIA-International. Principles. pdf Ë BSR, 2011, ‘Tools for Identifying, Assessing, and Valuing Ecosystem Services’ http: //www. bsr. org/reports/BSR_ESTM_WG_Comp_ES_Tools_Synthesis 3. pdf 70
References (cont. ) Ë World Bank - http: //go. worldbank. org/8921 B 8 K 420 Ë World Bank online resourceshttp: //siteresources. worldbank. org/SOCIALPROTECTION/Publications/20847129/SRMWBApproachto. SP. pdf Ë http: //changingminds. org Ë http: //www. managementaccountant. in/2008/05/stakeholder-analysis. html Ë http: //www. stakeholder-management. com/ Ë Johnson & K. Scholes, Exploring Corporate Strategy, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, 2002 Ë Perrot-Maître, D. 2006. The Vittel Payments for Ecosystem Services: A ‘Perfect’ PES Case? London: International Institute for Environment and Development. Ë Malavasi, E. O. and J. Kellenberg. 2003. Program for Payments for Ecological Services in Costa Rica. Available at: http: //www 2. gsu. edu/~wwwcec/special/lr_ortiz_kellenberg_ext. pdf Ë Maughan, R. ‘Potlatch Corp. to Charge Fees for Access to N. Idaho Forests’ Seattle Post-Intelligencer. October 4, 2006. Ë Bayon, R. ‘Making Money in Environmental Derivatives’ The Milken Institute Review, Q 1 2002 Ë Powicki, C. R. ‘Eco-Solutions Plays Key Role in Landmark Conservation Deal. ’ EPRI Journal Online. February 25, 2002 Ë Lashley, D. 2003. Market Based Case Studies Involving Eco-Asset Management On Non-Mined Lands. Green. Vest LLC Ë GHG protocol website, http: //www. ghgprotocol. org/calculation-tools 71
References (cont. ) Tools and frameworks chapter: Ë https: //www. ibatforbusiness. org/ Ë http: //www. worldwildlife. org/science/projects/freshwater/item 1991. html Ë http: //wwf. panda. org/about_our_earth/all_publications/living_planet_report/ Ë http: //www. iucnredlist. org/about Ë http: //www. ipieca. org/news/20110603/new-ecosystem-services-guidance-released Ë http: //www. riversfortomorrow. org/wft/ Ë http: //www. naturalcapitalproject. org/pubs/Web_Business. Brochure. pdf Policy trends: Ë http: //www. environmentlaw. org. uk/rte. asp? id=108 Ë http: //www. st-andrews. ac. uk/~dib 2/atmos/control. html Ë http: //www. clubofrome. org/? p=326 Ë http: //www. un. org/esa/sustdev/csd 15/media/backgrounder_brundtland. pdf Ë http: //www. un. org/geninfo/bp/enviro. html Ë http: //www. un. org. geninfo/bp/envirp 2/html Ë http: //ozone. unep. org/Publications/MP_Acheivements-E. pdf Ë http: //www. cites. org/common/prog/african-cherry/11 -CUNNINGHAM. pdf Ë http: //www. doc. govt. nz/upload/documents/about- doc/role/international/cites-crocs. pdf Extra case studies: Ë WRI (2012) CESR Case Study: Cemex Ë Alcoa (2011) Ecosystem services review of an aluminum smelter in a biosphere reserve 72
Case study: Mondi The issue: High water dependency Ë Mondi § Integrated paper and packaging producer, owns plantations in South Africa Ë South Africa § Fresh water, a scarce resource § 55% of South Africa’s wetlands to date have been significantly damaged due to poorly managed agriculture; mining, urban development, etc. Ë Because Mondi’s commercial activities (commercial forests and processing plants) use significant volumes of water, it relies on healthy wetlands and riparian zones. Ë Mondi used the ESR to develop a corporatewide strategy for addressing water scarcity in its South African plantations. Before After Example of wetland rehabilitation carried out by Mondi in South Africa 73
Case study example: Mondi (cont. ) The result Ë ESR Scope: § 3 of Mondi’s South African pine and eucalypt plantation areas (Shanduka, Siya. Qhubeka, and Tygerskloof) § One plantation, Siya. Qhubeka, is adjacent to a UNESCO World Heritage site, and the company wanted to explore opportunities for biodiversity enhancement and ecotourism. Ë Used the Dependence & Impact Assessment Tool to select six priority ecosystem services: § Freshwater. § Water regulation. § Biomass fuel. § Global climate regulation. § Recreation and ecotourism. § Livestock. 74
Case study step 2. Identifying priority ecosystem services Ecosystem service Impact/dependency Freshwater Rain-fed and irrigated farms depend on this service. Farmers also impact freshwater quantity and quality through agrochemical runoff. Water regulation Farmers depend on the ability of wetlands and forests to recharge aquifers for yearround access to water, and to mitigate harmful floods during monsoon season. Erosion regulation Farmers depend on vegetation to retain topsoil – poor agricultural practices have caused some localized negative effects, but other practices such as minimum tillage are improving erosion control. Pest regulation Farmers rely on native organisms to help control crop pests in integrated pest management systems. Monoculture, fragmentation of natural habitat, and inappropriate use of agrochemicals on farms degrade nature’s ability to help regulate pests. Pollination Many crops require pollination services. As a result of habitat changes and ecosystem degradation, agriculture can have negative impacts on pollination. Nutrient cycling Crops depend on nature’s processing and supply of nutrients. Poor farming practices sometimes inhibit this service, requiring more man-made nutrient inputs. 75
Case study example: Mondi (cont. ) The result (cont. ) Priority ecosystem service Potential risks Freshwater Ë Increased water scarcity due to: n Invasive alien species proliferation n Increasing demand among nearby, inefficient water users (farmers) n Climate change Water regulation Ë See above Potential opportunities Type of risk/opportunity Ë Internal efficiency improvements Operational in freshwater use Ë (Co)financing water efficiency improvements of nearby landowners Biomass fuel Ë New biomass-to-energy markets Market and product for plantation residues Global climate regulation Ë Emerging markets for carbon sequestration Recreation and ecotourism Ë Ecotourism or recreation-based Market and product revenue streams from companymanaged wetlands/grasslands Livestock Market and product Ë Reduced plantation productivity due to increasing grazing pressures Operational Ë Increases scrutiny from nearby stakeholders for perceived “underutilization” of Mondi land set aside as wetlands/grasslands Reputational 76
Case study example: Mondi (cont. ) The result (cont. ) Ë The ESR: § Highlighted the relationship among many of the known drivers of water scarcity (e. g. , invasive species, climate change, poor irrigation by upstream users). § Expanded the analysis beyond the scope of the existing environmental management systems to include systematic reviews of more ecosystem services such as biomass fuel and ecotourism. § This uncovered new solutions and a platform for building a freshwater strategy stretching from the plantation management to community engagement, and even to their government relations divisions. 77
- Slides: 77